Securitization, environmental issues and Dutch political parties

Institute of Security and Global Affairs/Institute of Public Administration Leiden University – Faculty of Governance and Global Affairs

Securitization, environmental

issues and Dutch political parties

A research on how Dutch political parties

frame environmental issues

Mart van Assem S1152718 Crisis and Security Management Leiden University – Campus The Hague 03-08-2018 Master Thesis Thesis supervisor: S. Wittendorp Second Reader: J. Matthys

1

Table of Content

Sub-questions and readers guide ... 5

2. Theoretical framework ... 7

Introduction ... 7

The concept of security ... 8

Defining environmental threats ... 10

Environmental security ... 12 Theory of Securitization ... 14 Concluding discussion ... 16 3. Methodology ... 18 Introduction ... 18 Content analysis ... 18

Inductive content analysis ... 20

Inductive qualitative content analysis ... 21

Unit of analysis and unit of observation ... 22

Operationalisation ... 23

Indicators ... 25

Strenghts and limitations ... 26

4. Deriving categories from the manifestos... 27

Introduction ... 27 VVD ... 28 D66 ... 31 CDA ... 37 ChristenUnie ... 39 GroenLinks ... 42 PvdA ... 44 PvdD ... 47 SP ... 51 50Plus ... 53

Forum voor Democratie ... 54

2

SGP ... 55

DENK ... 57

Concluding remarks ... 58

5. Determining the security frame from Dutch manifestos ... 60

Introduction ... 60

The Security Framework ... 60

The Economic Framework ... 64

The Food and Feed Framework ... 64

The Spatial Planning Framework ... 65

The National and International Politics and Policy Framework ... 65

Human Welfare Framework ... 65

Concluding remarks ... 66

6. Conclusion ... 67

Limitations ... 69

Research suggestions ... 69

Bibliography ... 70

Appendix A: Format of keywords ... 73

3

1. Introduction

In March 2017 the Dutch electorate had the opportunity to vote for the national elections. In the months before the elections, political parties had presented their manifestos. These manifestos describe the plans of the political parties for the coming four years, but also with an eye on the future that lies further ahead. From an environmental perspective these elections were particularly crucial, since the election of the 17th _{of March 2017 was the first election after the}

Paris Climate Agreement that was signed on the 4th _{of November 2016.}1 _{The individual}

governments of the countries, that had signed the agreement, are responsible for developing and implementing policies that are aimed at reaching the environmental development goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. Thus, the next elected government in the Netherlands is obligated to take the first steps towards a sustainable future, to make sure that the goals set in the agreement will be met. Although the Paris Agreement was not the first climate agreement – as the Vienna Convention was signed in 1985 and the Kyoto Protocol in 1992 – the world-wide commitment to this agreement is unique.

In the Netherlands, the Second Chamber almost unanimously supported the Paris Agreement, only the Partij voor de Vrijheid (PVV) did not support the agreement.2 To support the plans on climate change – keeping the Paris Agreement in mind – the VVD, PvdA, SP, D66, ChristenUnie, GroenLinks and the Vrijzinnige Partij (a party that did not get enough votes for a seat in the Second Chamber), had the effects on the environment of their plans calculated by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.3 Although these parties agreed to the Paris Agreement, their ambitions differ. SP, D66, ChristenUnie and GroenLinks have concrete plans and sharpen their ambitions, whereas the VVD does not have these ambitions.4 Although the parties agreed on the goals set by the Paris Climate Agreement, there is no general understanding on how to reach those goals.

Because there is no general understanding to reach those goals, involved political parties frame environmental issues differently. This research will provide insight which frames are

1 _{Europa-Nu.nl (2016), “Klimaatconferentie Parijs 2016 (COP21)”, https://www.europa-nu.nl/id/vjm}

hg41ub7pp/klimaatconferentie_parijs_2015_cop21, (last conducted on 6-2-2017).

2 _{Tweedekamer.nl (2017), “Ratificatie klimaatakkoord Parijs”,}

https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/plenaire_verslagen/kamer_in_het_kort/ratificatie-klimaatakkoord-parijs, (last conducted on 22-3-2017).

3 _{Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving (2017), “Analyse leefomgevingseffecten verkiezingsprogramma’s}

2017-2021”, http://www.pbl.nl/publicaties/analyse-leefomgevingseffecten-verkiezingsprogramma%27s-2017-2021, (last conducted on 22-3-2017).

4 _{Milieudefensie (2017), “Hoe groen en eerlijk zijn de politieke partijen?”,}

https://milieudefensie.nl/publicaties/bestanden/hoe-groen-zijn-de-politieke-partijen, (last conducted on 22-3-2017).

4 used when discussing environmental issues. In the introduction the research objectives will be further elaborated, by indicating the academic relevance and societal relevance of this research. This will result in the formulation of the research question and sub-question.

Academic relevance

The changing environment and its consequences are influencing different actors all over the world. On a global level, nations came to the consensus that the consequences of a changing climate should be dealt with by aiming to reach common goals. On a national level these goals have to be translated into policies. While on a regional or individual level people are already confronted with these consequences, some of these consequences are a security issue. For communities or other actors that are facing the consequences it is relevant that their problems are dealt with accordingly.

Urgency of a political or policy issue can be increased by the process of securitization. Securitization is the process where an issue is framed by influential actors as a security issue to create urgency for a solution to the problem. Buzan and Wæver (2003: 491) describe securitization as “the discursive process through which an intersubjective understanding is constructed within a political community to treat something as an existential threat to a valued referent object, and to enable a call for urgent and exceptional measures to deal with the threat.” Other authors argue that the securitization is not a process but that environmental security is a concept or debate on its own (Trombetta, 2008, Rwabizambuga, 2007, Detraz & Betsill, 2009, Lifting, 1999). By examining how Dutch political parties frame environmental issues it becomes clear how they cope with environmental issues. This insight is relevant since Stritzel (2007: 377) states that internalist readings and externalist readings need to be added to the body of knowledge on the securitization theory. The best way to do so is by providing ‘real world’ examples. The aim of this research is to do exactly that: are environmental issues considered a security issue within the securitization process or should it be classified as a security issue on its own? The conclusion of this real world example in the Netherlands will contribute to the body of knowledge of the securitization theory.

Societal Relevance

By signing the Paris Agreement, Dutch politicians have an obligation to the other countries to meet the objectives set in the agreement. As stated by Wӕver (1995), the chances of reaching the policy-making agenda increases when environmental issues are framed as security issues. By clarifying the reasoning behind the political agenda-setting, this research provides the public

5 with insights on how environmental issues are framed. By identifying why political parties use a certain frame on environmental issues, the electorate is able to judge the parties’ urgency on environment related issues. The sincere motivations of political parties can also be derived from this study regarding solving environmental issues. If political parties use sustainability and environmental protection to gain extra votes, since these concepts are important popular concepts, the electorate can judge for themselves the sincerity of the political parties regarding climate mitigation, sustainability objectives or environmental protection.

Research question

The objective is to establish how political parties elaborate on environmental issues in their manifestos. By studying the manifestos of Dutch political parties on the subject of environment, this objective will provide insights in the different frames political parties use when coping with environmental issues. If different frames can be identified in the manifestos of political parties, it is relevant to take the political ideology into consideration, since it might clarify their approach regarding environment and sustainability.

Traditionally the liberal parties counter societal difficulties by turning to the private sector, whereas the social-democrats tend to solve problems with more involvement of the government. These different approaches might influence the way political parties act in solving environmental related difficulties. Parties might see environmental challenges as an economic opportunity, and therefore frame environmental issues as economic issues, where other parties are more concerned about the consequences of global warming and frame these issues as security issues due to rising sea-levels and the implications that come with the rise of sea-levels. Therefore this research tries to determine if political parties approach environmental issues as security issues. To gain insight in this matter, the following research question is formulated: “To what extent do Dutch political parties frame environmental issues as a security

issue in their 2017 manifestos?”

Sub-questions and readers guide

To provide an answer to the research question, it is relevant to identify the frames political parties use in their manifestos. Therefore the supportive sub-question needs to be answered: which frames are used in the political manifestos of Dutch political parties regarding environmental issues? The answer to this question forms a relevant pillar to help to conclude this research. To get to the conclusion several aspects need to be clarified: the securitization theory and the concepts of environmental security and environmental threats. This will be done

6 in the following chapters; chapter two focuses on the securitization theory and environmental security to provide theoretical background; chapter three describes the methodology and data collection of the research; chapter four presents the results from the manifestos; these results will be analysed in chapter five and in chapter six the sub-question and main question will be answered to conclude this study.

7

2. Theoretical framework

As stated in the introduction political manifestos will be studied in order to provide insights in how political parties frame environmental issues, and to be more specific, to what extent they frame environmental issues as security issues. Before gathering these insights it is relevant to provide an overview of current literature on environmental (security) issues to create understanding of how and when environmental issues can be framed as a security issue. Framing a societal or political problem as a security problem depends on how a topic is approached, this also goes for framing environmental issues as a security issue. Before elaborating on the theory of securitization and the concept of security, clear understanding of the relevant concept benefit the validity and reliability of this study.

This chapter provides an overview of the debate regarding the theory of securitization and environmental security. In short, the debate regarding these concepts revolves around how an issue becomes a security issue. The literature on environmental security assumes that environmental issues are in fact security issues. The securitization literature on the other hand assumes that the process of becoming a security issue is leading. This debate is relevant for this research since the theory of securitization will form the theoretical framework in which environmental issues are discussed in the political arena.

Although the theory of securitization is leading in this research, further understanding of different concepts is necessary. As stated, the debate between the theory of securitization and the concept of environmental security is relevant, therefore the concept of environmental security will be explained and analysed. However this chapter will start by providing an overview of the literature regarding security and how that concept fits in this study. Indiscriminate when discussing security, attention should be given to the concept of a threat, for the benefit of this research further specification of an environmental threat is provided. Without an overview of environmental threats it will be difficult to frame certain issues as a security issue in the analysis of this research. After the elaboration on these concepts the debate between the theory of securitization and environmental security will be described.

The relevance of these concepts for this study lies in the assumption that by placing a security label on an environmental issue, the likelihood of making it on the political agenda increases (Wæver, 2002), so to some extent this provides insight on why political parties use certain frame on environmental issue, either by securitizing the subject or by referring to the subject as a security issue.

8

The concept of security

Neither the ambition nor the objective of this research is to formulate an all-encompassing overview of existing literature on the concept of security. The sheer size of the body of literature makes this an unrealistic challenge, and given the objective of this research it is also not relevant to provide such an extended overview. Despite of this it remains important to provide insight into different approaches and understandings of the concept. By comparing different scholars, and including the debates in this study, this study provides insights in the body of knowledge which will be used in this study, but can also benefit other researches.

The concept of security has long been unidentified in academic debates, Baldwin (1997) took the opportunity to change that by discussing the relevance of a definition of security without normative or empirical concerns. He supported his search for a definition by quoting Oppenheim’s (1975) statement on the effect of clear concepts to solve research problems: “without clear concepts, however, scholars are apt to talk past each other, and policy-makers find it difficult to distinguish between alternative policies”. The goal of this paragraph is to develop an understanding of security to make the dialogue in this research possible.

There is a general understanding that since the end of the Cold War the concept of security broadened and included more aspects than only military security (Buzan & Wæver, 2003; Baldwin, 1997; McDonald, 2002). The decreasing tension between the global West and global East opened the path for other issues which could be considered a security issue. With a broader spectrum of security issues after the Cold War, the concept of security broadened simultaneously. To redefine a workable concept Baldwin redefined the statement made by Wolfers that security is “the absence of threat to acquired values” to “a low probability of damage to acquired values” (Baldwin, 1997, p. 13). By doing so he opened the window for non-military threats such as natural disasters or criminality to be considered a security issue. Next to that he also raised two questions has to be answered using this criteria for the concept of security: “security from whom?”, and “security for which values?” The traditional – before the end of the Cold War – answer to the first question regards foreign entities harming territorial values. The modern answer is more extensive since it includes values of states, social actors, individuals and private companies, which do not only concern territorial values. Baldwin (1997) states that these two questions are sufficient to define the concept of security, despite that fact that they provide little guidance on how to pursue security. In order to avoid a dimension of security which is too broad, and therefore becomes unworkable, it remains relevant to limit the scope of security. Baldwin (1997, p. 17) elaborates by arguing that at least three specifications must be clarified: the means, costs and time period of security. These three specifications

9 support practical implications of the concept. It is therefore not a problem if one definition of security does not capture a security approach totally, nor does the conception remain static, security discourse choose as much as are chosen (McDonald, 2002). This implies that security is “a profoundly social construction rather than an ontological given or set of definition to which actors adhere” (McDonald, 2002). Despite of this, McDonald agrees with Baldwin that security has ontological content on the matter of freedom of harm and what entities should be classified as threats.

From a human security perspective it is relevant to distinguish to whom security is for since the scope of the secured actors is broader, compared to the traditional – or military approach – that puts the state at the heart of security, both as the actor who should be secured and as the actor that provides security. This perception changed after the Cold War, security is from then on increasingly defined as the security of individuals as human beings, and not of citizens of a state, and includes a broad spectrum of security issues, including environmental issues (Græger, 1996). The human security perspective is relevant for this research since it encompasses a broader spectrum of security issues including environmental security. The United Nations (1994, p. 3) included the following security aspects in their definition of human security: “human security is relevant to all people, rather than just the state; security of the people has global consequences; long-term objectives have higher revenues than short-term humanitarian assistance”. The UNDP report states that human security has two main aspects: “it means, first, safety from such chronic threats such as hunger, disease and repression. And second, it means protection from sudden hurtful disruptions in the patterns of daily life – whether in homes, in jobs or in communities” (UNDP, 1994, p. 23). These security implications can be the result of environmental changes, “environmental degradation leads to natural disaster, followed by human tragedy” (UNDP, 1994, p. 23). Because environmental changes can enforce human tragedy, the UNDP (1994, p. 24-25) report includes environmental security as one of the seven security aspects of human security next to economic, food, health, personal, community, and political security. This same broad definition of the concept of security is used by O’Brien and Barnett (2013), as they state that the objective is a dignified life. Regarding environmental security, they emphasise that human security has a function to highlight environmental change as a social problem with environmental characteristic, rather than an abstract scientific problem than can be disarticulated form social process (O’Brien & Barnett, 2013). By pulling the environment out of an abstract framework and placing it in a social reality, social objectives can be formulated in a political arena. Security threats should be dealt with accordingly, and since security resolves around the alleviation of threats security is unavoidable

10 political, and can be used as a political tool in gaining government attention (Williams, 2008; McDonald, 2002). The political aspect of security is that the process of identifying who is in danger from whom, is constantly changing. New perspectives and new scientific discoveries can change the way an issues is approach or can change (political) objectives. “Specifying the actors to be protected, from whom and in what form, is a political act” (McDonald, 2002, p. 289).

An understanding of the broad concept of security is relevant, “if one has no concept of security, one cannot know whether one is threatened with losing it or not” (Baldwin, 1997, p. 8). Security resolves around the exclusion or alleviation of threats to cherished values. Since it resolves around values, threats cannot be an objective thing and should therefore be approached in a constructive manner. This entails that the understanding of the concept of security in this research stretches beyond the concept of military security but also includes environmental security and aspects of human security. Since individuals and even societies as a whole have different values, the concept of security is a social construct which is interpreted differently depending on these values. So in this research the concept of security should be understood in a broad perspective and approached as a fluid social construct.

Defining environmental threats

For the purpose of this research it is relevant to briefly elaborate on the concept of threats, but especially focusing on environmental threats. With clarification of the concept, and with insight in which values are cherished, threats can be identified, and as a result of a political process be dealt with. Parallel to the transition of the traditional pre-Cold War security approach towards the broader post-Cold War security approach, threats have been defined differently. Whereas the traditional threats were often considered military threats from foreign entities, new threats include, identity and migration, stability of global economy and environmental systems (Buzan & Wæver, 2003). The UN report (2004) A more secure world identifies six clusters of threats exercising the world’s governments: “economic and social threat, including poverty, infectious disease and environmental degradation; inter-state conflict; internal conflict, including civil war, genocide and other large-scale atrocities; nuclear, radiological, chemical and biological weapons; terrorism; and transnational organised crime” (UN, 2004: 2). These clusters mainly focus on (traditional) violent behaviour between actors on all levels: global, state, regional and local level. The broader human security perspective can be identified in the economic and social threats, which also includes environmental problems.

11 There is a rather broad scope of environmental threats, which include bio-diversity loss due to its implications for the survival of species, including human life; depletion of atmospheric ozone, due to it implication of solar radiation; and nuclear (power) disasters, which can have catastrophic environmental consequences (Barnett & Dovers, 2001). The most relevant aspects for this study will be identified and elaborated on: resource scarcity, environmental externalities, threats regarding social disturbances, but first briefly natural disasters.

Although natural disasters are difficult to include in the security perspective – since natural disaster are not directly caused by human activity – and little can be done to prevent natural disasters – they indeed form a threat to human life. An increase of the ‘natural’ threat level can however be the result of human induced environmental problems and the consequences of natural disaster become more violent (increased tornado intensity, more extreme weather conditions, and an increase in flood risks). Population growth, environmental degradation and damage to ecosystem services as a result of human activity, has two major consequences: first, biophysical systems could destabilise and trigger irreversible environmental changes which threatens human well-being (Stern, 2006). And second, people are forced to live or migrate to areas where natural disasters can occur more frequent, increasing the risk of being victim of a natural disaster (UNDP, 1994).

Apart from natural disasters, three environmental threats can be identified: threats related to scarce resources, environmental externalities and threats regarding social disturbances or environmental refugees (Rwabizambuga, 2007). Scarcity of resources is the result of three factors: environmental change, population growth and unequal distribution of resources (Homer-Dixon, 1994). However, the scarcity of resources on its own is not a security threat, however it becomes one when social tensions arise as a result of scare resources.

Environmental change results in land degradation, sea-level rise and extreme droughts, making it difficult for people to provide for themselves. These consequences of climate change are however unevenly felt on a global scale, just like climate change is induced unevenly on a global scale. There can be a main-divide identified between the global North and global South, where the global North has the biggest impact on climate change and where the global South feels the consequences of climate change the most, and the South at the same time has an economic development backlog which it wants to decrease (Paterson, 2009). Population growth in the developing world and an increase per capita consumption in the industrialised world have led to greater demand for scarce resources. The loss of arable land, water scarcity, overfishing, deforestation and the alteration of ecosystems pose daunting challenges for sustainable

12 development (UN, 2004, p. 25). “Environmental scarcity has insidious and cumulative social impact, such as population movement, economic decline, and the weakening of states. The rate and extent of such conflict will increase as scarcities worsen” (Homer-Dixon, 1994, p. 36). This shows that scarcity of resources is interlinked with the other two environmental threats, it forces people to migrate and economic externalities, such as the consequences of CO2-emissions, are felt on a global scale. “Particularly important is the insistence that today’s threats to our society are all interconnected” (UN, 2004, p. vii).

A result from these social pressures, human rights can be violated or conflicts can develop (O’Brien & Barnett, 2013). Relevant to mention is the consensus that these environmental threats are simultaneously a local and global problem: “the environmental threats countries are facing are a combination of degradation of local ecosystem and that of the global system” (UNDP, 1994, p. 28); “the environmental degradation is an example of a local problem with global consequences” (Warner et al., 2010, p. 692); solutions on a political level should respect planetary boundaries and their implications for national policy-making and international negotiations (Raworth, 2013). As a result of the implications on local and global level – since economic externalities, migration streams and resource scarcity crosses national borders – it is not surprising that these borders between local and global levels become increasingly blurred and making international cooperation is necessary (O’Brien & Barnett, 2013; Lifting, 1999).

Environmental security

Not surprisingly, with the traditional military threat between the United States and the Soviet Union fading, the post-Cold War era opened a window for debating the environmental security discourse as a common approach to security affairs (Trombetta, 2008; Rwabizambuga, 2007), turning the environment into a security matter. There are two relevant discourses when placing environmental issues in the security spectrum; environmental security and environmental conflict. Therefore making environmental security a debate rather than a concept (Floyd, 2008). Yet, elaboration on the concepts help to better understand which issues, formulated in the political manifestos, could be perceived as a security issue.

“The environmental conflict discourse focuses on the potential for humans to engage in violent conflict over resources which in return threatens the security of the state” (Detraz & Betsill, 2009, p. 306). This conflict discourse can be understand in the traditional approach on security where natural resources, such as oil and gas, have always been a catalyst for (international) conflicts, and where the security of the state as an entity should be protected.

13 The environmental security discourse is a broader discourse compared to the conflict discourse. Furthermore, the environmental conflict discourse can be incorporated in the environmental security discourse as it affects several areas of human well-being (Detraz & Betsill, 2009). Contrary to the focus on the security of the state in the conflict discourse, the environmental security discourse focuses on the alleviation of threats for human well-being. This is in line with the, on the one hand, traditional approach of security, and on the other hand, the human security approach. The combination of the inclusion on the environmental conflict discourse in the environmental security discourse, and the broader scope of the latter discourse – which corresponds better with the research objectives of this study – justifies the choice to focus on the environmental security discourse in this research.

Barnett and Dovers (2001) define the environmental security as the process of peacefully reducing human vulnerability to the effects (and risks) of human induced environmental degradation by addressing the root causes of environmental degradation. Two remarks on this definition are relevant to mention. Firstly, they do not include environmental disasters in this definition, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, avalanches etc., but only environmental threats which are the result of human influences on our climate. Secondly, this definition states that environmental issues can only be classified as a security issue if human action can reduce the threat, again, leaving natural disasters out of the equation. The divide between a natural disaster and a human influence natural disaster is however difficult to distinguish in reality, since there is scientific consensus that human activity influences our climate resulting in heavier rainfall, intensifying hurricanes and even earthquakes as a result of gas extraction. So this definition does not clearly state where the line ends when discussing a security threat or a mere inevitable disaster, without clarifying what the security implications are for human well-being. But, by not including natural disasters Barnett and Dovers (2001) keep the opportunity to operationalise the concept, since human actions are impressionable and are changeable by regulations, measurements, policies and control.

Another important notion is that the perspective on nature changed, nature is no longer considered as a challenge for human well-being but rather as a supportive fact of life which deserves protection. “Environmental degradation is in itself a severe threat to human security and all life on earth. (…) This way many definitions of environmental security have focused on sustainable utilisation and protection of the human environment. Nature is no longer the opponent of society, against which humanity must struggle to survive: it is something that we must protect from the negative consequences of our own activities” (Græger, 1996, p. 110). The consequences of climate change can be felt at both a local and global level, however, the

14 environmental threats do not stop at our socially constructed borders. So to cope with these border crossing environmental threats, “true environmental security can only be achieved if environmental security is moved out of the state-centric threat and defence nexus” (Floyd, 2008, p. 6). When placing the environmental security discourse outside the traditional spectrum it is not surprising that traditional security counter measures will not overcome environmental security issues. According to Liftin (1999, p. 364) there are three arguments that support this statement: “The declining utility of force and the growing salience of non-state actors are likely to persist. The second being that climate change, land degradation and desertification, the largest wave of species extinctions since the dinosaurs, and multifarious pollutant are real and growing sources of insecurity. And third limiting security language to military threat cedes too much ground to security traditionalist.” Referring back to Barnett and Dovers, environmental security should be achieved by focusing on how human influences on environmental degradation can be mitigated. Public policy therefore needs to be developed, therefore the political manifestos of the Dutch parties are analysed in this research.

Theory of Securitization

In the previous paragraphs the concept of environmental security has been discussed. This paragraph concentrates on the theory of securitization. This is relevant since the theory approaches the environment, or any other issue, not necessarily within a security framework, but aims at identifying the process of something becoming a security issue. The underlying idea of the theory is that, by changing the (political) approach, regarding a certain issue, will lead to a change in the interaction about that issue. The theory of securitization is developed by Wæver in the context of the Copenhagen School and elaborated by Buzan and Wæver in Regions and

Powers: The Structure of International Security (2003). Consequently, their work will be used

to describe the theory, but reviews and critical remarks will be added, to formulate a complete picture of the theory and to discuss how this theory will be applied in this research.

The definition of a security issue in the theory of securitization is different from the concept of environmental security. In the definition provided by Buzan and Wæver (2003, p. 71) the movement of becoming a security issue rather than a fixed framework is directly clear: “a security issue is posited (by a securitizing actor) as a threat to the survival of some referent object (nation, state, the liberal international economic order, the rain forest), which is claimed to have a right to survive.” So it is a situation where a referent object faces an existential threat and where extraordinary measures are justified to the relevant audience (Wæver, 2014). The addition made by Wæver (2014) who states that an audience that is influenced by framing has

15 a relevant voice regarding extraordinary measures. The audience should have the willingness to accept the extraordinary measures in order to make the measurement possible. In their definition three concepts need further attention: the referent object, threat to survival, better understood as existential threat, and the audience. The referent object is the object which need to be secured, “it is any collectivity that defines its survival as threatened in terms of identity (typically, but not only, nations)” (Buzan and Wæver, 2003, p. 70). Opposite to the referent object are the securitizing actors, the actors who make claims about societal security (Buzan and Wæver, 2003).

When debating an existential threat it is important to clarify existential. Relevant – especially to the environmental (security) debate – is the aspect of no return in defining an existential threat, classifying something as an existential threat indicates that something has to be done or something should not happen. By stating that something has to be done or should not happen, Buzan and Wæver (2003) argue that the issue needs to be placed outside ‘normal’ politics. Discussing an issue outside the normal political arena, it becomes a necessity and therefor an existential threat (Wæver, 2014) and changes the interaction between involved actors and the referent object. An existential threat consequently demands extraordinary measures, measures which need to be accepted by the relevant audience.

As stated the audience should accept the extraordinary measures, this is because by framing an issue as a security issue several implications arise. According to Wæver (2014) making an issue a security issue creates a trade-off, to gain urgency, (political) focus, or ability to act, one has to keep in mind that de-democratisation occurs, since an issue is placed outside the normal politics spectrum and into a more shielded security spectrum. The relevant audience can differ depending on the political system in place. Although Buzan and Wæver mention the general public or public administrative audiences, they do not specify the nature or status of the audience (Balzacq, 2005).

So the securitization theory seeks in society what threats are present and a securitization actor sees what exceptional measures can be taken with the acceptance of the public, and aims at framing or labelling the issue as a security issue. “The very act of labelling something a security issue – or a threat – transforms this issue, and it is therefore in the political process of securitization that distinct security dynamics originate” (Buzan and Wæver, 2003, p. 71). Relevant to understand is that Buzan and Wæver have a normative approach to the theory of securitization since it is dependent on (political) securitizing actors who label certain issues a security issue. Although Balzacq (2005) sees the normativity as a something which should be avoided, and argues that it can avoided by adding a strategic purpose to securitization to include

16 external context of the audience and the influence of both the referent object and the securitization actor.

Floyd (2011) has formulated three criteria on the moral rightness of the securitization process, holds securitizing actors accountable, and thereby accepts the normative approach: First, “there must be an objective existential threat, which is to say a threat that endangers the survival of an actor or an order regardless whether anyone realised this”. Second, “the referent object of security must be morally legitimate, which is the case only when the referent object is conducive to human well-being defined as the satisfaction of human needs”. And third, “the security response must be appropriate to the threat in question, which is to say that (a) the security response must be measured in accordance with the capabilities of the aggressor and (b) the securitization actor must be sincere in his or her intentions” (Floyd, 2011, p. 428). The first moral criteria of Floyd is in line with the definition provide by Buzan and Wæver, however it adds the notion of human well-being when classifying the referent object. The third criteria touches upon the possibilities of the audience who can judge the (extraordinary) measures of the securitization actor. It is important to add, that the third notion might be difficult to place within the environmental security debate since the aggressor is human activity or human lifestyle so a security response cannot be traditional response but should be aimed at adjusting norms and values. And point b made by Floyd is a rather interesting criteria for this study. In general one would assume that an actor would be sincere. However (and especially), during elections political actors aim at getting more votes than their competition. By (over)stating the importance of an issue political actors can win votes but might not have the sincere aspirations to approach the issue as promised.

Concluding discussion

The scope of the concept of environmental security has limited applicability (Rwabizambuga, 2007) due to the aims of the concept to be too all-encompassing, difficulties arise with operationalisation of the concept and thereby losing scientific value (Floyd, 2008). The scientific value of the concept is lost because of the broad variation of components of the concepts. According to Græger (1996) these components have to be dis-integrated in different categories where each category has to be qualified as a security issue.

Since the aim of this research is to identify if political parties approach environmental issues as a security issue, and if they do that to what extent – regarding extraordinary measures – the theory of securitization will be leading in this research. Focusing on the securitization theory does not entail that the concepts of environmental threats or environmental security are

17 irrelevant in this research. A wider concept of environmental security which includes environmental degradation as a result of human induced conflict or industrial land use – as debated in this chapter – can lead to environmental insecurity. When these components can be defined, the concept will retain scientific value (Græger, 1996). Since the focus will be on the political process of defining an issue as a security issue, applying the theory of securitization aligns better with this research objective and design, supported by the concepts discussed in this chapter.

18

3. Methodology

The political manifestos of the 2017 election are studied to provide an overview of the existing frames political parties use when discussing environmental issues. This objective will be reached by conducting a content analysis. This chapter provides the justification for the research design and research methods.

To a great extent the research is built around the content analysis of the manifestos of Dutch political parties. The first three paragraph are structured as a funnel going from a broad understanding of content analysis into a specified content analysis which corresponds with the objective of this research: the qualitative inductive content analysis. Following the elaboration of the content analysis. Then the unit of analysis, the unit of observation and the indicators will be discussed and clarified.

As mentioned in the theoretical framework, critical remarks have been made on human security and environmental security about the problems with operationalisation. This chapter therefore continues by operationalising relevant concepts: environmental security and environmental threats. Operationalising these concepts is relevant since they have a supportive function to the theoretical framework which is formed by the theory of securitization. Additionally, and most relevant, operationalising these concepts makes it possible to analyse to what extent, during the 2017 elections, political parties securitized environmental issues. After the operationalisation of these concepts the referent objects and the audiences will be operationalised to make the theory of securitization applicable. Finalising the methodology, the limitations of this research design will be discussed.

Content analysis

The manifestos of the thirteen political parties who were elected in the Second Chamber are included in this research. By including all the thirteen parties an overview of the entire political spectrum is provided, both opposition and government. In this study the content of the political manifestos will be analysed in order to establish in which framework environmental issues are discussed. This study has a similar approach to identifying frames as the study conducted by Schonhardt-Bailey (2005). In her study she used keywords to identify security frames in the speeches of President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry. “Identification of word classes and thereby the themes enables us to describe the Bush and Kerry’s discourse on national security matters” (Schonhardt-Bailey, 2005, p. 706). From the context in which environmental

19 issues are discussed in the political manifestos different frameworks will be derived after the identification of different themes and categories.

“A content analysis is a research technique for making replicable and valid inferences from texts (or other meaningful matter) to the context of their use” (Krippendorf, 2004, p. 18). To ensure the replicability of the research Appendix B provides an overview of the findings, structured by political party, in order to create the possibility for careful scrutiny so that the resulting claims can be upheld in the face of independently available evidence (Krippendorf, 2004). A clear set of indicators is a necessity for a replicable content analysis (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). How these indicators came about will be explained later on in this chapter. The developed indicators are the second step in establishing the findings of the content analysis. The first step is to locate environment related keywords so the context in which these keywords are discussed can be analysed. These keywords (see Appendix A) should be understood as indicators of environmental issues. From the context in which these keywords – or indicators of environmental issues – different themes can be derived. For example, the keyword ‘CO2’ is an indicator of an environmental issue since increasing CO2-emissions the climate changes. The context of CO2 can, for example, be CO2-emission trade, therefore the theme is emission trade. In the following paragraph, when the funnel becomes narrower, the step from theme to category will be discussed. So, the keywords are located in the political manifestos, then the context in which the keywords are mentioned will be collected, followed by further specification of the subject that is debated in the manifesto. The determination of an environmental issue as a security issue resolves around the indicators of security issues. These indicators are derived from the previous chapter where relevant security concepts where discussed.

The internal validity of an executed content analysis depends on how well an empirical measure reflects the real meaning of a concept which is taken into consideration (Babbie, 2010). The quality of the selected keywords as a reasonable measure of the variable, in this case environmental issues, determine to what extent the content analysis has face validity. Relevant to this research is the broad scope to increase the content validity. Since environmental issues cover a wide range of subjects, a broad selection of keywords is applicable and should cover all the relevant understandings of environmental issues. In Appendix A an overview of the selected keywords is provided. In this research the content validity is secured by an inductive approach when analysing the manifestos. If new keywords arise during the analysis, they will be added to create a complete range of concepts to get a complete understanding of environmental issues as they are debated in the political manifestos.

20 The second step of this content analysis is to determine in what context these keywords are mentioned. Since this research resolves around the theory of securitization and if political parties frame environmental issues as security issues, this chapter elaborates on the operationalisation of the theory of securitization and environmental threats and security. In the operationalisation of these concepts indicators will be discussed which determine to what extent an environmental issue should be understood as a security issue.

Inductive content analysis

A content analysis can be used in both inductive and deductive research (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). The choice for an inductive or deductive research depends on the knowledge upfront about the relevant subjects. When there is sufficient knowledge upfront a deductive approach is recommended, but with little knowledge prior to the research an inductive design is preferred (Lauri & Kyngäs, 2005).

Prior to this study there is not a clear overview yet of the different frames political parties used when debating environmental issues in their manifestos, therefore a inductive research design is applicable for this study. Discovering patterns on the basis of the indicators provides the answer to the sub-question of this research. Since the manifestos are studied one by one, it is likely that certain new keywords or indicators can arise when analysing a manifesto down the road. This is however not a problem. Corresponding with the inductive research approach, new themes can develop, the only objective then is to re-analyse previous studied manifestos to include the newly discovered themes. This results in the development of categories into a model or framework that summarises the raw data and includes the relevant themes (Thomas, 2003).

There is the possibility that a broad set of themes arise when analysing environmental issues. Keywords can be discussed in the context of the European Union to nature protection and from agriculture to electric cars. Therefore the second step is to categorise these themes finding common ground, for example electric cars, aviation and shipping can be combined in the category transport. The third step is translating the categories into frames, which eventually should lead to the formulation of a more limited number of frameworks. Figure 1 shows the process of extraction of frames from the manifestos. Combining the categories in frames, adds structure and clarity to the analysis since categories which are similar can be understood together in a broad framework, limiting the different understandings of the topic. According to Thomas (2003) inductive coding which has more than eight categories can be viewed as incomplete. Having more than eight frameworks indicates that the process of combining smaller

21 categories into more encompassing categories is not yet finished or that crucial decisions about which categories are the most important have not been made (Thomas, 2003). Therefore, in this study the aim is to remain between three and eight frames in order to provide a clear overview and a sufficient specification on how environmental issues are discussed in Dutch politics during the 2017 elections.

Figure 1: Frame development.

Inductive qualitative content analysis

Both qualitative and quantitative research can use a content analysis to collect data (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). This research primarily resolves around collecting qualitative data. However when analysing the manifestos the frequency of keywords is collected. This frequency does not provide insight in themes in which the keywords are discussed. Yet, the quantitative note is added to provide a sense of perspective. For example, the D66 has the manifesto with the most pages (171), it is therefore not surprisingly that the frequency of keywords is higher compared to the manifesto of the Forum voor Democratie which only has 26 pages. Nevertheless, the focus of this study is on the context in which the keywords are mentioned in the manifestos.

This results in the justification for collecting the data of this study by using a qualitative method. Since quantitative approach would not sufficiently clarify which frames political parties have in the context of environmental issues. And a quantitative research requires (a) in advance known relevant variables, and (b) in situations which are able to devise reasonable ways of controlling and measuring (Blanche et al., 2007). As stated, simply counting the frequency of environmental issue indicators – the keywords – does not sufficiently inform in what context the environmental issue is discussed. And since the variables are unknown beforehand, and in this study can develop during the research, a quantitative approach does not corresponds with the objective of this research.

A qualitative approach has the benefit of elaborating on the context in which indicators are discussed, making it possible to place these indicators in categories, allowing them to develop into frames. According to Blanche (et al. 2007) in a situation where it is unclear what the variables are, which ones are important, and how to measure them, an open-ended, inductive exploration is possible by using a qualitative approach. Precisely because it is not clear how

Indicators in the manifestos Developmet of themes Development of categories Frames

22 political parties frame environmental issues, a qualitative approach is suitable for this research. Including the qualitative aspect in the content analysis, the research method is complete. The combination of a qualitative and inductive approach fits this research since unknown frames need to be discovered and described in a detailed manner by examining the manifestos, with the objective to categorise environmental issues into different frames.

Each political manifesto is approached the same way. A fluid list of keywords, fluid since new keywords can be added when analysing different manifestos, will be used to see in what context the environmental issues are discussed. Keywords are located and the themes are drawn from the described context. The context in which the keywords of environmental issues are discussed will determine the theme, than the category, and eventually the frame which they will be appointed to. For example, the keyword ‘Climate change’ as an indicator of an environmental issue, can be discussed in the context of European cooperation to mitigate climate change. This theme will then be categorised in the category Europe which will then be placed the framework ‘National and International Politics and Policy’. This does however not entail that climate change can only be placed in the Europe category, since the context can differ which will influence the appointment to a certain category. In turn, different categories can be placed in the same framework. For example, the categories ‘Agriculture’ and ‘Fishery’ can be placed in the framework of ‘Food and Feed’. So a framework is a melange of different categories, themes and keywords, but has a shared main underlying subject.

For each manifestos and overview of the keywords (indicators), the amount of times keyword is present in the manifesto (N), and the context in which the keyword discussed will be presented. The quantity of the keywords in a manifesto does not determine what frames political parties use, but for this research it is relevant to see how often political parties use a particular keyword and in what context. This helps the analysis on whether or not a securitization process is happening or that sustainability or environmental issues are used to gain political capital since it is a relevant issues in this time of age. The context in which these keywords are located will be analysed for security indicators which can be drawn from the theoretical framework like social disturbances as a result of migration, issues with scarcity or imminent threats like sea-level rise or earthquakes.

Unit of analysis and unit of observation

The research question resolves around the manifestos of political parties for the elections of 2017. The unit of analysis are therefore the thirteen manifestos of the parties that had enough votes to seize a seat in the Second Chamber. From this unit of analysis, data is collected to study

23 the unit of observation. The unit of observation are the frames in which environmental issues are debated. The frames are the end-result of the content analysis, so in order to formulate the frames, the different themes which arise from the environmental issue indicators will be divided in different categories which in return will lead to the formulation of frames. Thus, themes, categories or frames will be examined on how common they are among political parties and in what context they are used by the parties.

Operationalisation

In the previous chapter the concepts of environmental threats and environmental security were discussed. In this paragraph the objective is to operationalise these concepts. By developing research procedures these concepts will be translated to representative empirical observations (Babbie, 2010). The objective is to further specify the concepts in order to analyse to what extent the theory of securitization – the securitization process – occurs during the elections of 2017 regarding environmental issues. Since the aim of this research is to identify how political parties approach environmental issues it is firstly relevant to identify which topics are related to the environment. Secondly, it is relevant to identify in which categories, and then frames, these topics are discussed. This determines whether or not an environmental issues is considered a security issue.

Environmental threats

When operationalising environmental threats, the previously discussed distinction between natural disasters and human caused environmental threats remains relevant and should be taken into consideration. First, the environmental problems are either caused by natural phenomena – without human interaction – or as a result of social relationships and interaction, and second where the environmental issues have an impact (Giddens, 2008).

In this research there is a grey area between human caused environmental impact and environmental impact as a consequence of natural phenomena and this needs clarification. There are some natural phenomena where human influences have little to no impact such as earthquakes and volcano eruptions. Relevant to mention since this research resolves around Dutch politics, and indicating that there is little human influence possible, gas extraction in Groningen has caused human induced earthquakes in the northern province which consequently led to a lot of political attention. It becomes more difficult when taking extreme weather conditions into consideration. Extreme colds or droughts, heavy rainfall or rising sea levels are the result of human induced climate change, but these weather conditions are not directly

24 influenced by human action, we cannot determine how much rain is failing. This research operationalise environmental threats taking human induced environmental threats and natural caused environmental issues in considerations since the objective is to see what issues fall under the umbrella of environmental security issues in Dutch politics. The variables as discussed in the theoretical framework include: scare resources, environmental externalities, and social disturbances including environmental refugees, land degradation, deforestation and water scarcity. These variables are identified in the political manifestos by using indicators to shed light on whether or not these subjects are considered an environmental issue which should be framed as a security issue.

The environmental externalities include extreme weather condition. Changing weather conditions are a global phenomenon but have often a local impact. Despite the direct impact is often on a local level, it can indeed cause regional, national or global implications, such as urbanisation or migration. These indirect consequences also have an impact on the Netherlands, there global and local environmental threats are both included in this research.

Securitization

Regarding the operationalisation of the theory of securitization it is relevant to elaborate on the operationalisation of the audience, the existential threat, and the referent objects. The audience should have a relevant voice, since they determine if extraordinary measures are accepted. One could argue that the result of the elections can be used as an indicator to estimate the willingness to accept extraordinary measure, but since the 2017 elections were general elections, and did not solely resolve around environmental (security) issues, it is impossible to determine whether the electorate accepted extra security measures or if other public issues gave the decisive factor to vote on a particular party. So in this research it is difficult to pin point the voice of the audience since the audience is the Dutch electorate.

The referent object on the other hand can be operationalised more precisely. Nature as an entity on its own is an object which needs protection, or cherished values such as geopolitical independence or human or animal welfare can be values which need protection. For example energy reliance from other nations can be a security issue for the continuation of economic development, resulting in a decrease or still stand of human welfare. This is also an example of how an existential threat is operationalised, something has to be done to overcome the issue. The securitization process is primarily, but not exclusively, operationalised by identifying these three indicators: the audience, the referent object and the existential threats. Particularly the referent object can be a broad concept which is interpreted differently by the thirteen political

25 parties. Relevant to state is that, since the acceptance of the audience of extraordinary measures is not included in this research, as stated earlier, this study will focus on whether or not these extraordinary measures are proposed by the political parties.

Environmental security

The same debate has been elaborated on in the previous chapter regarding environmental security. What are the possibilities to prevent, overcome or limiting environmental threats by politicians and policy-makers? Among others, climate mitigation policies – including greenhouse gas reduction – (disaster) precaution policies, development aid, and biodiversity preservation are included in this research to see if these policies are considered an environmental security issue.

These variables help to understand in which context environmental issue are discussed. This is relevant since the way a subject is approached determines if and how the subject is included on the political agenda (Pretty, 2007, Wæver, 2002). However changing a frame or an approach is not the only variable which changes political attention. “The formation and transformation of environmental issues as an agenda for public attention and policy-making depends on complex interactions between social movement activists, researchers, media communications, policy networks and communities, industrial lobbies, government departments, international organizations and many other actors” (Pretty et al., 2007: 14). Taking these interactions into consideration would go beyond the scope of this research, therefore the theory of securitization as a stimulator of gaining political attention when discussing political manifestos, is leading.

Indicators

Since this research revolves around thirteen different political parties, the political language can be different. As discussed in previous paragraphs an inductive approach fits in studying the frames used in party manifestos. Due to the differences in political language it is important to clearly formulate indicators on environmental issues, which are at the same time broad enough to incorporate potential differences in political language. The number of indicators used in this research is not fixed. When examining the manifestos some new indicators can be included which were not included in the examination of previous manifestos. So in order to create a reliable list of indicators and a reliable research, the set of indicators can only be completed after examining all the manifestos and re-examine manifestos if new indicators are identified. An overview of the used keywords can be found in Appendix A.

26

Strenghts and limitations

A limitation of this study is the solely inclusion of public documents as units of analysis. Although the manifestos give an elaborate overview of the different themes in which environmental issues are discussed, in order to formulate categories and then frames, they do not provide insight in the trail of thought about the considerations political parties had to make. This study can therefore derive a securitization move made by a political party from their manifesto, but can only justify that movement based on the explanation provide in the manifesto.

The exclusion of the acceptance of the audience can also be considered a limitation of this study since the acceptance of extraordinary measures is a part of the securitization process. However, this research resolves primarily around the securitization moves made by political parties, it is therefore justified to focus on the extraordinary proposal made by political parties.

The limitations of this study are compensated by the systematic analysis of the manifestos. The same outline in analysing the manifestos, reporting every step taken – where choices can be traced back and can be re-taken – results in an internal reliability. The provided context in which the indicators are discussed helps justifying why they are assigned to a certain category, followed by an assigned frame. This backbone of the study provides, into detail, how and if political parties frame environmental issues as a security issue.

27

4. Deriving categories from the manifestos

The established environmental keywords (Appendix A) which have been located in the parties manifestos are debated in a broad variety of different contexts, even within a single political manifesto the keywords are related to a wide range of themes. The objective of this chapter is to present which themes occur in the manifestos and to what categories these themes belong. The next chapter builds on this chapter by explaining what frames are used when discussing environmental issues. The introduction of this chapter is primarily to explain how the raw dataset is generated and which choices have been made in the inclusion or exclusion of certain issues and understandings. The precise context in which the keywords are mentioned in the manifestos can be found in Appendix B.

The political manifestos are discussed individually in this chapter the aim is to define the themes of the political parties in categories which can be appointed throughout the different manifestos. For each party some general information is provided about their manifesto, the number of pages, chapters devoted to sustainability, the quantity of the indicators and a brief summary of the categories. This information is provided to place the difference in the quantity of keywords in perspective. It is for example not surprisingly that the party with the longest manifesto (D66) has a higher quantity of keywords. Regarding the party with the shortest manifesto, the PVV, the results from their manifesto are discussed differently since their manifesto only consists of one page.

Additionally, when the keywords are mentioned in a security context, the context will be presented and explained why it belong to a certain category that can be included in a security framework. By presenting the results this way it might seem that political parties frame environmental issues primarily as security issues. However, as the complete dataset provided in Appendix B will support, environmental issues are often not discussed in a security context. This can also be derived from the tables provided per party where an overview of keywords, themes and corresponding categories are presented. After having discussed each political party this chapter will be concluded with a short summary of the data in general.

In Appendix B the results from the content analysis are presented elaborately, including indicators which are left out in the presentation of the results in this chapter. Some keywords – as indicators of environmental issues – are excluded because of the keywords are mentioned in the table of contents of the manifesto, chapter titles or paragraph titles, therefore the value for this research, identifying what themes are related to these keywords, is limited. And in some instances the keyword had an unrelated meaning. For example: ‘het criminele milieu’ which

28 means the criminal circuit has the keyword ‘milieu’ (environment), but in Dutch the meaning of ‘milieu’ is in this context different from the natural environment. These indicators are left out of the overview of the results in this chapter.

More than once different keywords are combined in one sentence, this leads to double, or even triple inclusion of that same sentence in the dataset. Since the quantitative aspect is merely used to place the different manifestos in perspective, the frequency keywords is of limited relevance for this study. Additionally the theme that is derived, from the context of that sentence is the same, double or triple inclusion in the raw dataset is therefore not a problem. The objective of this study is not to determine, for example what percentage of the environmental issues is considered a security issue, rather the objective is to identify whether or not a securitization process can be identified by looking at what frames are used.

It also occurred that an indicator is mentioned more than ones in one sentence. The theme however is only included once in this overview of the results. For example CO2 is mentioned three times in a sentence in the context of emission trade, emission trade as a theme is only included once. For the reasons mentioned above, it can occur that in the overview of the results the quantity of the keyword does not correspond with the number of themes. Each party is discussed individually and the results can be found in the provided tables and Appendix B.

VVD

In March 2017 the VVD was elected the biggest party of the Netherlands and is now one of the four parties which form the Cabinet. Rutte III is the third VVD led government of the Netherlands in a row. The other three parties in the Cabinet are the D66, the CDA and the ChristenUnie. The hundred page manifesto “Zeker Nederland” of the VVD had one chapter devoted to “Energy and Climate”, but the keywords – related to environmental issues – where located throughout their manifesto. In their manifesto they do not use the keywords ‘environmental pollution’ and ‘climate agreements’.

The keywords, as indicators of environmental issues, where discussed in many different themes which, in turn, resulted in a broad variety of categories: Transport, Energy, International dependence, Government, International Relations, Europe, Innovation, Economy, Food, Resources, Regulation, Construction, Spatial design and Safety. (see table 1) Relevant for this study is to look closer at the categories, International dependence, Resources and Criminality. In the categories resources and international dependence certain issues regarding the energy supply are mentioned: “The global growth of population and wealth go side by side with a growing demand for energy, commodities and food. Our energy supply is until now mainly